Muslim girl gang who kicked young woman in the head while yelling 'kill the white slag' escape jai

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by Twiptwop

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

well if i kept going, the post would be incredibly long.

you want more?

Only if you wish to continue embarrassing yourself with your complete lack of understanding about our nation, history, culture and people.

Just so you know, J.R.R Tolkein was South African, and that silly song you linked to was written by a Canadian.

but the shire is in england. you know it is. that's an english story written by an english man, who wrote it under a tree in south africa.

and while he was dreaming it up, he discussed it with his buddies from oxford.

oh did i mention oxford?

english is oxford.
english is tudor.
english is stuart.
english is stonehenge.
english is horses.
english is fox hunts.
(i can do this for places all over the world, btw)
english is cary elwes. (dread pirate westley. don't diss the dpw).
english is cobblestone.
english is mary poppins

english is big ben, twiggy, and beef eaters.
english is pretending the guy you're conversing with is not standing on your toe.

You have no idea how insulting and degrading what you are saying is. It is actually very hurtful to think that all you know of us are some nasty stereotypes. How sad.

sigh, some people are never happy.

i know what you want. you want the list to read like this:

english is bad.
english is horrible.
english is evil.
english is bad. oh i said that already.
english is mean.
english is not nice. (running out of ideas. i liked my other list better)
english is sinister.
english is not good.
english is the opposite of wonderful.

i dunno. i realize every country has problems and those are discussed here and around the internet at length. once in awhile it's good to look at something other than bad. if all you look at is bad, what will that do to your brain?

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
Come on Sherlock, you know damn well it does not as its hearsay unless heard by a third party and there's good reason for that. If it had been captured then it should have had a meaningful affect on the sentence, racial crime is a nasty that still goes on throughout the world, the States is awash with it at the moment, we don't need it here in any form.

Originally posted by Sherlock HolmesWhat I suspect is that the racist abuse that was claimed to have been made was only heard by the victim and her boyfriend, and not a third party. Hence why it would be a waste of time to push for the charge of racially-aggravated assault.

The fact of the matter is that they weren't charged with a racially-aggravated offence, and therefore the judge can't treat them more severely for an offence which they weren't charged with.

Therefore, what they were alleged to have shouted during the attack shouldn't have any bearing on the sentence.

Er yes, that's exactly what I replied and why I replied...You must have failed to notice..ho humm...I merely said that IF they had been heard it should have had an effect on the charge and the result.

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
What we do see here is a calculated attempt to use religion as an excuse for crime and the judge went and bought it.

The fact they used religion and can be clearly shown as just about anything but being Muslim at the time is what have should have been worked on, these are louts, I doubt that they even were class-able as drunk considering their very obvious mobility and careful body control during the fighting.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Again, saying that they ''used religion as an excuse'' is a complete misrepresentation of the events of the case.

It's a defence lawyer's job to try and get the best result for his client, hence why the claim that they were uncharacteristically drunk was used in mitigation. The defence lawyer only mentioned they were Muslim in passing, which presumably was done to give more weight to the claim that being drunk was out of character.

I'm well aware of a defence lawyers job but their defence was based on being Muslim made them unaccountable for their actions because Muslims don't normally drink. The fact that they were behaving un islamically BY drinking was not addressed and nor should it have been as the actions seen on the video was of people very fluid in movement, no staggering until the police van came by one of them. These people were clearly NOT very drunk at all and I bet there was no reading of their levels to back this up as I suspect levels are only taken in driving offences.

The religion aspect is rubbish, should never have been allowed, plenty of people drink without beating crap out of innocents, in this case 4 people all had this sudden 'reaction' to drink.

The video evidence is most important, it shows their ability to run and mobilise their hands and feet, its not indicative of a drunk, merely a set of louts.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

What makes you think - other than a pre-conceived prejudice and confirmation bias - that these women receiving non-custodial sentences is any different to all of these other similar cases ?

I am not even giving thought to other cases, things need to be dealt with case by case, this clearly was a huge cock up and allowing the religious aspect was a serious abuse, it sends 'drunk Muslim bad but not really at fault'

It matter not what the paper printed, its what the judge replied about, he chose to allow this bizarre interpretation of Muslims rituals that I've never seen before in my life.

These girls are totally Westernised, they are not Muslims in anything but name, the defence therefore is irrelevant.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by Twiptwop


oh pardon, didn't realize i was stepping on your toe. 'bout time ya said something.


hey, btw, does this mean you won't be involving yourself in conversations about america?

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

oh pardon, didn't realize i was stepping on your toe. 'bout time ya said something.

hey, btw, does this mean you won't be involving yourself in conversations about america?

edit on 7-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)

I will be involving myself in any conversation I feel like. Especially those conversations that revolve around the complete nullification of foreign relations with the US.

Originally posted by sapien82
it's even more incredible that someone else posted that english people are a race !
WTF !

therefore the word racism , needs to be ammended in the dictionary , as there is no such thing as racism
on earth , there is xenphobia , and a phobia of people of different skin colour.

You’re partly right. ‘Racism’ is a ridiculous term (but then it would be – it was a Marxist creation, invented to cow white people into silence about policies aimed at subverting Europe). A more accurate term would be ‘Specism’ or ‘breedism’ (or something that better rolls off the tongue).

See… there is the Human animal, and within it there are multiple species or breeds – just like dogs. And like dogs, different species can interbreed and create mixed-species children. However, that said, there is a tangible difference between human species. Each has evolved into a beautiful, unique entity, tailor made for the environment they live in with their own unique arts, languages, values and worldviews.

That diversity is – in my opinion – one of the most wonderful things on planet Earth and I will fight to the death anyone who wishes to see it eradicated through action, apathy or complacency.

Oh and there most definitely IS an English ethnic group, and we belong to the European species of Human. We are genetically similar to other Europeans but distinct enough culturally to be granted our own unique identity. Isn't that great?!

Originally posted by Twiptwop

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

oh pardon, didn't realize i was stepping on your toe. 'bout time ya said something.

hey, btw, does this mean you won't be involving yourself in conversations about america?

edit on 7-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)

I will be involving myself in any conversation I feel like. Especially those conversations that revolve around the complete nullification of foreign relations with the US.

well then ditto.

soooo,
english is barrows.
english is druids.
english is celtic.
english is crop circles.
english is protestants
and english is catholics.
english is christians.
english is muslims.
english is jews.
english is whites, blacks, reds, yellows, and oranges.
english is bobbies.
english is fish and chips.
engilsh is ale.
english is squatters.
english is the tax man.
english is bankers.
english is small cars (that drive on the wrong side of the road )
english is c.s. lewis.
english is museums.
english is subways.
english is cameras all over the place.
english is falcons.
english is merlin.
english is tor
english is camelot
english is king arthur.
english is a language.

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
As said, many cultures have come and mixed, but this Radical Islam isn't here to mix at all, its here to convert and promote the additon or take over of Shariah ways and law.

You are quite well-informed, thinking like I was a year or so ago. I ask you to do one thing – question who exactly is sanctioning the rise of radical Islam in Europe and whether it would be an issue had certain forces not forced the situation. Now ask who those forces might be – you probably won’t like what you find if you’re as smart as you seem. Here’s a clue: Palestine.

Originally posted by Twiptwop
Just so you know, J.R.R Tolkein was South African

A wolf born in a stable is still a wolf

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by Twiptwop

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

oh pardon, didn't realize i was stepping on your toe. 'bout time ya said something.

hey, btw, does this mean you won't be involving yourself in conversations about america?

edit on 7-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)

I will be involving myself in any conversation I feel like. Especially those conversations that revolve around the complete nullification of foreign relations with the US.

well then ditto.

soooo,
english is barrows.
english is druids.
english is celtic.
english is crop circles.
english is protestants
and english is catholics.
english is christians.
english is muslims.
english is jews.
english is whites, blacks, reds, yellows, and oranges.
english is bobbies.
english is fish and chips.
engilsh is ale.
english is squatters.
english is the tax man.
english is bankers.
english is small cars (that drive on the wrong side of the road

)
english is c.s. lewis.
english is museums.
english is subways.
english is cameras all over the place.
english is falcons.
english is merlin.
english is tor
english is camelot
english is king arthur.
english is a language.

Why. What is the reason for your posts? Why are you insulting us?

reply to post by Twiptwop


i'll have you know that american education and tv programming includes a nice cross section of every mistake ever made by any government on the planet, and pretty much any religion on the planet. we learned all the drama of the royals, all the bad, the good and the inbetween of what it means to be british. today, however, i don't feel like dwelling on the bad. take it up with my therapist.

reply to post by Twiptwop


Im sorry mate. but who are you to start saying who can contribute to threads and who cant. I am always commenting on American politics in threads made by Americans. Its a global board with people from all over the world. Get over yourself. Undo has made 2 very complimentary lists of what she thinks Englishness is and all you have done is insult her. You my friend are not being a very good and polite Englishman. You need to scrub up on your manners.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

Im sorry mate. but who are you to start saying who can contribute to threads and who cant. I am always commenting on American politics in threads made by Americans. Its a global board with people from all over the world. Get over yourself. Undo has made 2 very complimentary lists of what he thinks Englishness is and all you have done is insult him. You my friend are not being a very good and polite Englishman. You need to scrub up on your manners.

I refuse to treat representatives of a nation which funded terror in our nation for over 40 years, that engineered the downfall of our nation, that refused to back us up in Suez yet expects us to help them, that openly states they would assist Argentina if they invaded the Falklands among many of the slights they have dealt us, as anything other than an enemy of our people and nation.

(undo is a female)

i recall speaking with a lady who had perfect english. she talked something like this:


i was mesmerized. it's musical in quality. she was an older lady. i just told her to keep talking.
she laughed and blushed, but it's true. beautiful language.

reply to post by Twiptwop


You need to learn that not everyone is your enemy and despite what nations governments may or may not have done in the past , it is not a reflection of the citizens who live there. Remember we dont have a whiter than white history ourselves.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by Twiptwop

 

You need to learn that not everyone is your enemy and despite what nations governments may or may not have done in the past , it is not a reflection of the citizens who live there. Remember we dont have a whiter than white history ourselves.

Yes it is. They vote in their governments, they are responsible. Each and every one of them is responsible.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

I've already dismantled your vapid and illogical point some time ago.

You are making a comparison between a real-life case and a case which only exists in your mind.

So you are basically conceding that you have no case that demonstrates a gang of whites who attacked a black person getting off because they are drunk?




Thought not.

By the way, while you feel that the cases you link to back up your argument, can I let you into a secret, 'legal' boy?

All of your cases are off point because the material facts are different.

Perhaps you should do your Law 101 again?

Everytime I read something like this, I picture someone having a 'closed door' meeting with the judge. In that meeting, an envelope is given to the judge in exchange for him/her to "do the right thing".

Now I know why the Georgia Guidestones were built. They are ringing truer every day.

sherlock,

i will say, however, that the press is infamous for manipulating public opinion, and although it was nice of the "judge" to rule leniently in their case, it isn't a good precedent to do so uncharacteriscally, because it suggests the government is trying to draw the ire of parts of their citizenry against other parts, and that's never going to be a good thing.